https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/4fadb071686856858aceda2c62d0795b.pdf bb0bcbbbfe5afbf06103ac657ca6c95b PDF Text Text VILLAGE OF SLEEPY HOLLOW ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING-APPROVED September 17, 2008 The meeting was called to order by Robert Anello, Chairman at 8:28 pm. The Chair noted that a quorum was present. Present: Robert Anello, Chairman Eliot Martone Timothy Judge Diane Martello Linda Moiron Gordon Swartz Absent : Peter Koffler Also Present: Anthony DelVecchio (Recording Secretary) Sean McCarthy (Village Architect/ Village of Sleepy Hollow) Agenda: 1) Adam & Wendy Derechin 61 Merlin Avenue 2) Grotto Holding Corp 300 North Broadway 3) Approval of minutes from May and July 2008 Proposed 2 story addition Proposed new deck Announcements: The Chair noted that the Marte application and the Yeung application are not on the agenda this evening. 1) Adam & Wendy Derechin 61 Merlin Avenue Proposed 2 story addition - Adam Derechin is the owner and is representing this application. The Chair read the public notice aloud for the record. The Chair asked if the proof of mailings were received. Sean McCarthy responded yes. The Chair stated that the Board is in receipt of the following: 1) application dated 7-7-08 2) short EAF 3) property survey dated 7-2-08 4) plans 5) revised plans dated 9-4-08 The Chair stated that the addition is not creating the variance. He stated that the variance is for a pre-existing non-conforming use. �Adam Derechin stated that the application involves adding a bathroom and a mud room on the second floor. He stated that the owners are trying to keep the original architecture of the house. The Chair stated that this is a variance is the smallest variance than can be approved. He also stated that this is not detrimental to the neighborhood. He stated that this is not a self-created hardship since it is a pre-existing non-conforming use. The Chair asked if the Board had any questions. There were none. The Chair opened the public hearing. Since there were any public comments, Eliot Martone made a motion to close the public hearing. Diane Martello seconded. It was unanimous (6-0). Timothy Judge made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Linda Moiron seconded. It was unanimous 5-0 (Swartz abstained). 2) Grotto Holding Corp 300 North Broadway Proposed new deck - This is a continuation from previous meetings. Greg Kuczinski is an attorney representing this application along with project architect, David Barbuti. The Chair reviewed all newly submitted materials. Greg Kuczinski reviewed the application to date. He summarized the current application. He stated that the parking requirements have been revised and meet the current code. He stated that there is no variance requested for the number of parking spaces. He stated that there is a requested variance for the width of the 2 transient spaces. He stated that an elevator was required as per NYS Code. The Chair asked the applicant to show the location of the elevator. David Barbuti showed the location of the elevator. He stated that the elevator can be accessed from the parking area. Greg Kuczinski stated that the variances are needed for the pre-existing non-conformity with the exception of the new awnings on New Broadway. The Chair asked for clarification on the revised parking calculations. Greg Kuczinski responded that the original parking calculation required 5 parking spaces were added onto the parking requirements based on the number of employees in addition to the 1 APPROVED - Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting, September 17, 2008 2 �parking space for every 300 feet of building space. He stated that 23 parking spaces were needed for the building size plus the 5 additional parking spaces for trucks for the business. Sean McCarthy stated that the parking requirement was based on the identified needs of the applicant. He stated that a standard parking space is 9’x 18’. The Chair asked for clarification on the compact spaces. David Barbuti responded that the compact spaces are spaces #4 and #5. He stated that the nontransient spaces are spaces #6 thru #10. The Chair asked about turning radius requirements. Sean McCarthy responded that there are no code requirements for turning radius. Timothy Judge asked about supply and material deliveries to the property. David Barbuti responded that almost all supplies are delivered to the job sites. The Chair stated that the loading space blocks some of the parking spaces. Sean McCarthy responded that parking spaces 9 and 11 would be unavailable if the loading dock is being used. The Chair asked if the Planning Board has approved the parking plan. Sean McCarthy responded that the Board is reviewing the parking plan. The Chair asked if the trucks would fit in the garage area. David Barbuti responded that the garage doors would be raised as part of the construction. He stated that the owner would not keep trucks in the parking lot overnight. He stated that the trucks would be stored in the garages. The Chair asked about the buffer requirements. David Barbuti responded that the buffer variance is still needed. He stated that the applicant still wants to install a staircase from the parking lot to the front of the property. The Chair asked the applicant to explain why an area variance should be granted. Greg Kuczinski stated that the application is not an undesirable change to the neighborhood. He stated that the structure is a pre-existing non-conforming structure. He also stated that this is not a self-created hardship. The Chair asked if there is a use for the building that would eliminate the need for a parking variance. Greg Kuczinski responded that the building size would have to be reduced. He stated that the building is 13,000sf but only 6500sf are proposed for office. He stated that the remaining space is not being used. The Chair asked if the building would be used for a residential use, there would be no parking APPROVED - Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting, September 17, 2008 3 �variances at all. He stated that the need for a parking variance is based on the request to use the property as an office building. David Barbuti responded that multi-family residential would still require a parking variance. He stated that the only use that would not require a parking variance is a warehouse or wholesale establishment. The Chair stated that a restaurant built in the existing building without any expansion would only need 15 spaces. He also stated that building a residential building within the existing square footage would only require 17 parking spaces. The Chair asked if the applicant had any additional information to add. There was no additional information. The Chair asked if the Board had any questions. Gordon Swartz asked about the gas meter layout. Greg Kuczinski responded that there are 5 meters proposed for the property. He stated that there is a meter for the common area. He also stated that the remaining meters are for the owner and the remaining office tenants. Gordon Swartz responded that the more businesses at the property, the more traffic that the neighborhood would have as a result. Greg Kuczinski responded that the variance is based on the square footage of the property. He stated that the owner is willing to appear before the Board before the remaining office space is divided up. The Chair asked if the applicant would be willing to have a limitation of 3 tenants placed on the approval. Greg Kuczinski responded yes. Gordon Swartz asked about impacts of expanding the business. Greg Kuczinski responded that the applicant has been in business for 20 years. He stated that his business is not planning on expanding in the immediate future. The Chair asked if the parking space calculation is based on the number of employees. Sean McCarthy responded no. He stated that it is based on square footage. There was an open discussion on the number of employees in the business. David Barbuti reviewed the office layout to illustrate the number of employees. Timothy Judge stated that based on the layout, there are 13 employees in the offices. He stated that the office employees are in the building all day. He asked about the truck parking. Greg Kuczinski responded that the trucks would be on the job sites. The Chair asked about the number of standard size spaces. APPROVED - Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting, September 17, 2008 4 �Greg Kuczinski responded 6 full-size spaces. The Chair asked for clarification on transient and non-transient parking spaces. David Barbuti clarified the definition for the Board. The Chair opened the public hearing. Since there were no public comments, Eliot Martone made a motion to close the public hearing. Linda Moiron seconded. It was unanimous (6-0). The Chair stated that the parking plan is still questionable. He stated that the loading dock blocks 2-3 parking spaces. He stated that there are other ways to reduce the number of required parking spaces. He stated that the elevator has alleviated some of the parking issues but the square footage is still an issue. He stated that if the glass showroom were removed, the lower square footage would probably reduce the parking requirements. He also stated that the Planning Board’s review of the parking plan would be helpful. He stated that it is an undesirable change to the neighborhood. He stated that the building looks terrible. He stated that the existing appearance of the building might be a pressure tactic by the owner to force the Village to approve the application. He stated that this application is a self-created hardship. He stated that the setbacks are not self-created but the proposed use is self-created. He stated that there are other ways that the owner can use this building without the parking variances. Greg Kuczinski responded that 2 parking spaces are being lost from the proposed landscaping buffer on the North Broadway side. He stated that the owner did not apply any pressure tactics by starting construction. He stated that the owner is trying to save some time by performing some of the work. The Chair stated that the Planning Board’s review of the parking plan would assist the Board’s decision. He also stated that eliminating the glass showroom would remove the owner’s office. Greg Kuczinski stated that the Board could grant a conditional approval subject to the Planning Board’s review of the parking plan. There was an open discussion on the existing sign that is on the property. Eliot Martone asked if the applicant had a sign permit for the existing sign. Sean McCarthy responded no. Gordon Swartz stated that the owner has created an eyesore. Greg Kuczinski responded that the owner has other properties and he takes meticulous care of those properties. He stated that the owner will take very good care of this property once it is built. He stated that the owner needs to move into the property. The Chair stated that the applicant should return with a statement from the Planning Board indicating that all of the proposed parking spaces would be useful or the applicant should appear before the Board with a plan showing reduced square footage. APPROVED - Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting, September 17, 2008 5 �Sean McCarthy reviewed §62-48. He stated that the Board would ask the Planning Board for a recommendation. He stated that the Planning Board would have 30 days to respond. He stated that the Board would need a unanimous vote to overrule the recommendation of the Planning Board. There was an open discussion on whether or not to refer this matter to the Planning Board for a recommendation. Eliot Martone stated that the application should be referred to the Planning Board Timothy Judge asked if a traffic study was performed at this location Sean McCarthy responded no. Sean McCarthy stated that he would try to expedite the application thru the Planning Board. The Chair stated that if the Planning Board does not provide a positive recommendation on the exiting parking plan, the applicant has the option to revise the parking plan or reduce the square footage of the proposed structure. Gordon Swartz made a motion to refer the parking plan to the Planning Board for a recommendation. He also stated that if the Board would grant a variance, it would place the following conditions on the variance: 1) Limiting the office space to 3 tenants. 2) All trucks can be parked in the indoor garage overnight. Timothy Judge stated that the applicant should consider removing the glass showroom and replacing it with green space. Linda Moiron seconded. It was unanimous (6-0). 3) Minutes from May and July 2008 meeting The minutes from the May 2008 meeting were reviewed. Gordon Swartz made a motion to approve the minutes as submitted. Linda Moiron seconded. It was unanimous (6-0). The minutes from the July 2008 meeting were reviewed. Gordon Swartz made a motion to approve the minutes as amended. Linda Moiron seconded. It was unanimous (6-0). Adjourned 10:38 pm. APPROVED - Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting, September 17, 2008 6 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Zoning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2008 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource MINS_ZONING_2008-09-17 Subject The topic of the resource Zoning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2008 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2008 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Village of Sleepy Hollow All Rights Reserved. Type The nature or genre of the resource Text